Le 15/5/16 à 10:37, Denis Kudriashov a écrit :

Hi.

I am sure I saw model inside presenter in Spec. It was one of reason why presenter is better name. We had Model model. Now it is Presenter model. But if your wrote this there is no reference from presenter to model now?

I do not know. In the spec array there is from time to time a reference to model. The interpreter was checking from model (last time I read it before ben' refactoring) Now this is too early so that I'm clear :)

15 мая 2016 г. 10:29 пользователь "stepharo" <stepharo@free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> написал:

...

> In MVP the presenter has direct access to the Model and (of course it means that the Model API is fixed)

I did not mean that Model :) I meant the relationship with View.

Stef

...

Why would that be true? You can plug the necessary behavior of how the model can be accessed, so no need to fix the Model's API. After all the actual model will vary from user the user, so the API can't be fixed.

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 8:39 PM, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> wrote:

Hi

In MVP the presenter has direct access to the Model and (of course it means that the Model API is fixed) but I wonder if this would not

help us simplify Spec.

Model <---- presenter <----> View

What do you think?

Stef